Texture is a key element in interpreting remotely sensed images of fine spatial resolution. The integration of textural information in an automatic image-classification process is usually done via textural images, which are often created by calculating gray levels co-occurrences matrices (COM). A COM is a histogram of frequencies of pairs of pixel values present in local windows associated with all pixels in the used image; each pixel pair being formed using a given orientation and spacing. COM allows calculation for more than a dozen of parameters describing in various ways the frequency distribution, creating thus as many different textural images. Texture measurements approach based on COMs had been mainly applied on monochrome images (e.g. panchromatic, single polarisation and frequency radar images). In the case of multispectral images, a single spectral band, among those available, is usually chosen to generate texture images. The question we asked in this research concerns precisely this limited use of textural information in the case of multispectral images. In fact, the visual effect of a texture is created, not only by the spatial arrangement of variable objects/pixels brightness, but also of different colors.
Several ways are suggested in the literature to introduce this concept of multi-dimensional texture. In this research, two of them were of particularly interested us. In the first way COMs are calculated spectral band by band and in the second one, generalized COMs are applied involving the joint use of two spectral bands. In the latter case, the pairs of pixel values are defined in two different spectral bands. This allows, in a single treatment, for a broad accounting of the "color" element composing a texture. These two approaches are called integrative techniques. To distinguish them, we call them respectively “gray textures” and “color textures”. Our research concerns the comparative analysis of the opportunities offered by applying these two types of textural signatures in the specific case of an automated land cover mapping using multispectral images. A textural signature of an object or class of objects, by analogy to spectral signatures, consists in a set of texture parameters measured; band by band (grey textures), or by pairs of bands (color textures).This research was designed not only to compare the two integrative approaches, but also to identify the components of textural signatures favouring the differentiation of land cover classes: texture parameters, window sizes and bands selection.
To do this, a site within the territory of the Montreal Metropolitan Community (Longueuil) was chosen with a diversity of land covers representative of a semi-urban area. (residential, industrial / commercial, woodlots , agriculture, water bodies…). A SPOT-5 (4 spectral bands) image of 10m spatial resolution was used in this research. Since an infinite number of texture images can be created by varying the design parameters of COM, and to better define our problem, we have decided, taking into account studies published in this field: a) to vary the computation window from 3*3 to 21*21 pixels while setting the pixel spacing and direction to (1,1); that is to say, an spacing of 1 and an orientation of 135 ° between pairs of pixels. b) limit the COM analysis to eight texture parameters (contrast, correlation, standard deviation, energy, entropy, homogeneity, average, maximum probability), all of which are computable by the Unser’s fast-COM-approximation method, c) form the two textural signatures by the same number of elements chosen from a separability analysis (Bhattacharya distance) between land cover classes, and d) analyse the results (confusion matrices, accuracies, kappa) obtained using a maximum likelihood classification algorithm to conclude on the potential of both integrative approaches; classes to be recognized included: low and high density residential, commercial / industrial, agricultural, woodlots, turf (including golf) water bodies, clouds and their shadows.
Our main conclusions are as follows a) except maximum probability, all other textural parameters are useful in the formation of textural signatures; mean and standard deviation are most useful in the formation of gray textures while contrast and correlation, are the best in the case of color textures b) the overall classification accuracy achieved an acceptable score (85%), only in the case of color textural signatures. This is a significant improvement compared to classifications based solely on spectral signatures, whose accuracies are often situated around 75%. This score is reached with windows size from about 11*11 to 15 * 15 pixels, c) Textural colors signatures offer higher scores, ranging from 5% to 10%, than those obtained by gray signatures. This is true while using the smaller process windows (5*5, 7*7, and occasionally 9*9) d) For several land cover classes examined individually, the accuracy is above 90% regardless of the used textural signatures e) Only one class is better separated from the rest by gray textures, the agricultural one; f) Classes creating a lot of confusion, which largely explains the overall classification score of 85 %, are the two residential classes (high and low density).
As a final conclusion, we can say that the integrative approach by color textures provides a greater potential for mapping land covers using multispectral images than the integrative approach by gray textures. For several land cover classes an appreciable gain computing time of textural parameters may be obtained using smaller size windows. Significant improvements of the classification results (even better than 90%) are expected using calculation windows with sizes better adapted to each classes particular texture characteristics, A hierarchical classification method could then be used to separate each class at a time from all others, instead of a broad classification where the integration of parameters calculated with varying size windows, would inevitably lead to confusion between classes.